Laserfiche WebLink
Colorado Division of Mining and Geology <br />February 25, 2003 <br />Page 3 <br />Engineers has apparently determined that this site is a non- <br />jurisdictional wetland. Amore thorough review, as has <br />apparently been conducted by the Colorado Department of Wildlife, <br />however, may demonstrate otherwise. For example, Froze Creek <br />lies in the affected area and lies within the drainage basin of <br />the Arkansas River. The application indicates that <br />excavation/mining indeed will take place within the channel of <br />Froze Creek. There are existing decrees for diversion of Froze <br />Creek surface water downstream of this site which could be <br />adversely affected by the miring activities. The presence of <br />these water rights and others downstream on Grape Creek may also <br />have bearing on the determination of whether the channel and <br />related wetlands should be considered "waters of the U. S." or <br />"jurisdictional wetlands" for a permit considerations by U. S. <br />Corps of Engineers. The Colorado State Engineer and Colorado <br />Water Court for Division 2 have determined that Froze Creek is <br />tributary to the Arkansas River. Since receiving the permit <br />application, my client's experts have been prevented from <br />evaluating the area for indications of wetland vegetation because <br />of the snow cover currently present. This is of particular <br />concern, also, in the context of the proposed concrete and <br />asphalt batching plants. <br />It is important to reiterate the Colorado Department of <br />Wildlife's recommendation/evaluation concerning maximum <br />excavation areas being in increments of not greater than five <br />acres. It greatly concerns my client that this evaluation has <br />been ignored. It logically follows that larger increments of <br />excavation/mining will have larger wildlife, vegetation, and <br />water impacts than would the more restricted recommendations of <br />the Colorado Department of Wildlife. <br />Due to the limited water resources in the project area, the <br />application should specify the water sources to be used in the <br />washing and treatment of the aggregate to be mined. Details <br />should also be provided regarding the asphalt and concrete <br />production plans for the area, as well as a description of the <br />related water supply requirements and discharge characteristics <br />in terms of both quantity and quality. <br />The application also seeks approval for removal and sale of <br />topsoil. This request, in and of itself, demonstrates a lack of <br />commitment to meaningful reclamation. Topsoil is normally <br />required to be saved for site reclamation. Not only does the <br />application not provide for that eventuality, it seeks to have <br />topsoil removed and available for sale. <br />